Fire from above: Flaming arrows

**SwordsMaster** · 10-26-2004, 00:14

Hi all,
maybe another pointless topic, but I wanted to make this comment to see if someone else has experienced it:

I noticed in my last campaign (Julii, h/h) that archers get more kills if they DONT use flaming arrows, specially against armoured units. All has to be said, horses seem quite vulnerable to flames (ribs, anyone?).

So, the is use of flaming arrows restricted to siege engines? Or are there any other more "burnable" units?

Dunno maybe some of those hairy "Drunkard" barbarian generals

.

Thanks for the responses.

**Heinrich VI** · 10-26-2004, 00:24

i only use the flaming arrows when assaulting a city with a woodden wall and to scare enemy elephants until they run amok.

**Jeanne d'arc** · 10-26-2004, 00:25

I find flaming arrows to be more lethal then normal arrows esspecially when u concentrate fire on masses of soldiers.

**SwordsMaster** · 10-26-2004, 00:31

Originally Posted by Jeanne d'arc

I find flaming arrows to be more lethal then normal arrows esspecially when u concentrate fire on masses of soldiers.

Logic says it should be like that, coz one burning souldier would set on fire those around him, but It didnt happen to me. Sure, you do get kills, but you get more with normal arrows. Besides, why would they use normal otherwise?

**Basileus** · 10-26-2004, 00:34

dont forget the morale hit they get from fire arrows, if i have more then 2 archer units i set one to shot firearrows and the other 2 normal works preety good

**Malachus** · 10-26-2004, 00:35

From the battles I've fought on VH/VH, flaming arrows didn't seem to kill as many as normal arrows did. Not to mention, flaming arrows do take a little longer to reload, so if u need to put down some arrow fire quickly, it's not a good option. Yet, the flaming arrows do set fire to wooden objects, as noted berfore, plus they are supposed to have an added morale penalty for the enemy being shot at.

**LordKhaine** · 10-26-2004, 03:08

Now firepots on onagers... that's a totally different matter. For those unsure of the differences... firepots are FAR less accurate, seem to damage stone walls a lot less. But you can set fire to buildings, and if you get a firepot smack in the middle of an enemy unit it's just slaughter!

**eadeater** · 10-26-2004, 03:37

The fire arrow debate is an interesting one. Personally I find that fire arrows do more damage, but I'm not sure, it's very dubious.

**crazyviking03** · 10-26-2004, 03:39

their lower kill rate (that i have found in my experiences) is not worth the lag caused by them

**Encaitar** · 10-26-2004, 07:27

When using flaming arrows, archers are less accurate and fire at a reduced rate.

**Tyburn JIG** · 10-26-2004, 09:12

Originally Posted by crazyviking03

their lower kill rate (that i have found in my experiences) is not worth the lag caused by them

Same here....i cant use fire arrows.

But the AI can normally squeeze a few volleys off....which is more than i can squeeze from my frame rates when it does.

I dread them in battles now.

There has to be some problem with fire arrows......the battle engine runs fantastically on high/highest detail settings,large units...until that is the sweet FA`s let loose.

Just 1 unit of archers using fire is enough to kill my frames.

**Orvis Tertia** · 10-26-2004, 20:05

Someone more motivated than I should test this by pitting stationary units against each other in a variety of controlled scenarios and getting a total number of casualties per battle (until ammo runs out) and average kills per volley. Test armored and unarmored, infantry and cavalry, etc.

**Haido** · 10-26-2004, 20:08

Flaming arrows are stupid.

First of all i dont see why anyone would be more afraid of flaming arrows.
Second of all if you get hit by a flaming arrow you dont burn up now do you? Were all the clothes made during Roman times highly flammable?

I see only advantages with normal arrows except when you want to destroy wooden walls and that does not happen all that often.